Just say no to testing

Published: Thursday, October 10, 2013 at 08:00 AM.

The superintendent has been especially uncomfortable with the proposal, arguing that schools cannot combat society’s problems. He also has raised the privacy issue, and indicated that if testing were to occur it would be better to test everyone instead of just those who are active outside the classroom. “If it’s good for one, it’s good for everybody,” Husfelt told The News Herald’s Jacqueline Bostick.

Any drug testing should be based on probable cause, such as when a student is behaving as if he is under the influence (of course, that could open officials up to lawsuits challenging their judgment, which is why they prefer blanket policies of suspicionless testing).

Officials should be more concerned about illegal drugs being on campus, not what students might be doing in their spare time away from school. That’s an issue that is reserved to parents. Board Member Ginger Littleton wisely suggested leaving the testing to Mom and Dad (at-home kits can be purchased for $30 or less).

The board took no action on Walker’s proposal, and members indicated it will be discussed further. It’s good to see, though, that the bar has been set very high for its adoption.

Bay District School Board members, Superintendent Bill Husfelt and parents Tuesday were appropriately skeptical of a proposal to randomly drug test students who participate in extracurricular activities.

District officials have the legal right to institute such a policy, as many school districts in Florida and the nation already have. But that wouldn’t make it the right move.

Board Member Joe Wayne Walker, noting an increase last year in the number of students expelled for drug offenses, has suggested the district require that students who participate in athletics or clubs — even those who drive to school and park on campus — submit to random tests. Walker said he would like to model the district’s policy after Escambia County’s, which was adopted in 2011.

In 1995, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that random drug tests of student athletes do not violate the Fourth Amendment’s prohibition of unreasonable searches and seizures. In 2002, the court expanded that ruling to all extracurricular activities. A slim majority declared that schools have an “important interest in detecting and preventing drug use among [their] students.”

Although the legal door is wide open for them to conduct testing, it was good to see several district officials at Tuesday’s School Board meeting hesitate to cross that threshold.

Even the district acknowledges that research indicates that random drug testing by schools does little if anything to reduce drug use by students. If the aim is to combat drugs in school, singling out students who participate in extra-curricular activities makes little sense as it ignores all the kids who aren’t involved in sports or clubs. Do their drug habits not matter? Are their lives not worth improving?

There’s also the message that such policies send to students. Testing is an invasion of their privacy (albeit a constitutional one, according to the courts) and can be demeaning. It treats all subjects as guilty until proven innocent — they are all suspects in the eyes of school administrators.

The superintendent has been especially uncomfortable with the proposal, arguing that schools cannot combat society’s problems. He also has raised the privacy issue, and indicated that if testing were to occur it would be better to test everyone instead of just those who are active outside the classroom.
“If it’s good for one, it’s good for everybody,” Husfelt told The News Herald’s Jacqueline Bostick.

Any drug testing should be based on probable cause, such as when a student is behaving as if he is under the influence (of course, that could open officials up to lawsuits challenging their judgment, which is why they prefer blanket policies of suspicionless testing).

Officials should be more concerned about illegal drugs being on campus, not what students might be doing in their spare time away from school. That’s an issue that is reserved to parents. Board Member Ginger Littleton wisely suggested leaving the testing to Mom and Dad (at-home kits can be purchased for $30 or less).

The board took no action on Walker’s proposal, and members indicated it will be discussed further. It’s good to see, though, that the bar has been set very high for its adoption.

Most Recent

NOTE: Clicking on hashtags in this stream may result in seeing adult material, such as photos or foul language, that appear elsewhere on Twitter. We do not endorse such material, but we do not have control over what items can be found in hashtag searches.